Dose-escalated Hypofractionated Intensity-modulated Radiation Therapy With Concurrent Chemotherapy for Inoperable or Unresectable Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The local control of inoperable non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using standard radiotherapy (RT) doses is inadequate. Dose escalation is a potential strategy to improve the local control for patients with NSCLC; however, the optimal dose required for local control in this setting is unknown. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients with unresectable or inoperable stage II/III NSCLC with ECOG≤1 received 48 Gy in 20 daily fractions using intensity-modulated radiotherapy, followed by 1 of 3 boost dose levels: 16.8 Gy/7 (cumulative 2 Gy equivalent dose [EQD2]≅76 Gy/38), 20.0 Gy/7 (EQD2≅84 Gy/42), and 22.7 Gy/7 (EQD2≅92 Gy/46). Two cycles of cisplatin/etoposide chemotherapy were given concurrent with RT. The maximum tolerated dose was defined as the dose at which ≥30% experienced dose-limiting toxicity (any NCIC Common Terminology for Adverse Events V3.0 grade 3 or higher acute toxicity). RESULTS: Twelve patients completed treatment with a median follow-up of 22 months (range, 7 to 48). The median age was 72 (range, 54 to 80) and 50% of patients had adenocarcinoma. Five, 3, and 4 patients were treated on dose levels 1, 2, and 3, respectively. No dose-limiting toxicity was observed. One-year local progression-free survival and overall survival estimates were 81% and 58%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy was well tolerated and provided meaningful local control for patients with locally advanced inoperable NSCLC. The maximum tolerated dose of RT in this setting lies beyond an EQD2 of 92 Gy/46 and further dose escalation in this setting is warranted.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".